mrc100

My Feedback: (4)

Is there a problem with creating a redundant system in the following way?

One switch battery combo into one receiver the other in the other receiver. Now simply connect both switches with a modified servo extension. I've read that this will provide full control in the event of a battery or switch failure and half of the controls if one receiver fails. I am using two 5-cell battery packs.

Thanks for the help.
Mike

P-40 DRIVER

These days most guys are running 2 batteries, 2 switches, one reciever, 2 aileron servos, split elevators(2 servos), one rudder servo and one throtltle servo on a typical giant scale plane. Receivers are generally considered the most reliable component in the system. This combination will hopefully allow you to get your plane on the ground if you lose any one component except the receiver or transmitter. Keeping it simple and properly maintained is the best way to avoid crashes and that go's for every component in the plane not just the radio.

dragoonpvw

My Feedback: (7)

I do my big planes just that way, I have had other systems that do it all but have had less and less confidence. I have had a brand new receiver go bad ( before the first flight) so I generally pre test them now, I also use two in large scale planes for that reason. I use a jumper between each receiver to transmit power for battery backup.
This is the way that many large scale builders do it in europe. It is a requirement in many to have two receivers in a large scale model. this is a high level of redundancy, and order above the same setup with one receiver.
Good Luck
Paul